2015 ORS 40.155¹
Rule 402. Relevant evidence generally admissible

All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by the Oregon Evidence Code, by the Constitutions of the United States and Oregon, or by Oregon statutory and decisional law. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible. [1981 c.892 §22]

(Rule 402)

See also annota­tions under ORS 42.230 (Office of judge in construing instruments) in permanent edi­tion.

Notes of Decisions

Testimony that defendant had chased an­oth­er per­son with hammer 20 years ago was not probative of defendant's intent at time of shooting. State v. Parks, 71 Or App 630, 693 P2d 657 (1984)

Evidence from witnesses who watched defendant's driving for 10 to 15 minutes about 5 minutes before and two and one half miles from fatal collision was admissible under this sec­tion in pros­e­cu­­tion for crim­i­nally neg­li­gent hom­i­cide. State v. Brinager, 96 Or App 160, 771 P2d 658 (1989), Sup Ct review denied

Where testimony re­gard­ing matrix system was relevant to informant's credibility and to issue of whether informant had "deal" with state and was acting as state's agent, evidence was properly admitted. State v. Smith, 310 Or 1, 791 P2d 836 (1990)

State's introduc­tion of evidence of victim's pregnancy was relevant to prove defendant's motive. State v. Smith, 310 Or 1, 791 P2d 836 (1990)

If choice-of-evils de­fense is unavailable under substantive law, evidence in support of de­fense is inadmissible. State v. Clowes, 310 Or 686, 801 P2d 789 (1990)

Chapter 40

(Generally)

Notes of Decisions

General rule is that polygraph evidence is inadmissible in pro­ceed­ing governed by Oregon Evidence Code. State v. Brown, 297 Or 404, 687 P2d 751 (1984)

Party could introduce results of polygraph test taken by spouse for purpose of showing that response of party upon learning polygraph results was reasonable. Fromdahl and Fromdahl, 314 Or 496, 840 P2d 683 (1992)

Where state law completely precludes reliable, ma­te­ri­ally exculpatory evidence, exclusion of that evidence violates Due Process Clauses of United States Constitu­tion. State v. Cazares-Mendez, 233 Or App 310, 227 P3d 172 (2010), aff'd State v. Cazares-Mendez/Reyes-Sanchez, 350 Or 491, 256 P3d 104 (2011)

Oregon Evidence Code articulates min­i­mum standards of reliability that apply to many types of evidence for admissibility, including eyewitness identifica­tion evidence, and parties must employ code to address admissibility of eyewitness testimony. State v. Lawson/James, 352 Or 724, 291 P3d 673 (2012)

Law Review Cita­tions

59 OLR 43 (1980); 19 WLR 343 (1983)

Chapter 40

Evidence Code

Annota­tions are listed under the heading "Under former similar statute" if they predate the adop­tion of the Evidence Code, which went into effect January 1, 1982.


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 40—Evidence Code, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors040.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 40, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano040.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.